An abortive attempt at prayer book revision was undertaken in England during the 1920’s. The 1928 BCP legislation was defeated in Parliament, but the prayer book was used with and without the permission of the bishops throughout the Anglican Communion for many years to come (see Case Study 4.54 for more details). Despite the moderate realism of the eucharistic liturgy of this book (e.g. the inclusion of an anamnesis and epiclesis and the extension of the Prayer of Consecration so that it resembled the extended prayer of consecration in the 1549 BCP) there was no change in 1928 to the questions and answers in the catechism referring to the Eucharist. It seems that those who compiled the 1928 book were satisfied that the catechism of 1604/1662 contained a theology of the Eucharist which adequately reflected the moderate realism of the eucharistic liturgy of that prayer book (see Case Study 1.42).

Another abortive attempt at prayer book revision was that undertaken in England during the 1920’s. The 1928 BCP legislation was defeated in Parliament, but the prayer book was used with and without the permission of the bishops throughout the Anglican Communion. Despite the moderate realism of the eucharistic liturgy of this book (e.g. the inclusion of an anamnesis and epiclesis and the extension of the Prayer of Consecration so that it resembled the 1549 BCP) there was no change to the questions and answers in the catechism referring to the Eucharist. It seems that those who compiled the 1928 book were satisfied that the catechism of 1604/1662 contained a theology of the Eucharist which adequately reflected the moderate realism of the eucharistic liturgy of the new prayer book.

Others however, throughout the Anglican Communion, did feel the need to make changes and additions to the catechism and this was done by some religious societies and endorsed by some Anglo-Catholic dioceses. A Catechism Authorised for use in the Diocese of North Queensland by the Bishop of North Queensland went through many editions and was in effect a catechism first published in 1917 by the Bush Brothers, an Anglo-Catholic religious society who worked in remote areas of Australia. This catechism apparently was used throughout Australia in other dioceses besides North Queensland since the Bishop of North Queensland acknowledges the wide use of the catechism in his Preface (Bishop’s Preface, A Catechism Authorised for use in the Diocese of North Queensland, 1965: 2).

In relation to the Eucharist the North Queensland catechism presents a realist notion of Christ’s presence and sacrifice. The following will illustrate this:

“THE HOLY EUCHARIST

163.What is the Holy Eucharist? – The Holy Eucharist is the Sacrament in which we plead before God the Sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ on the Cross.

164.What does ‘Eucharist’ mean? – ‘Eucharist’ means thanksgiving.

165.By what name is the Holy Eucharist called in the Prayer Book?– In the Prayer Book the Holy Eucharist is called the Holy Communion or the Lord’s Supper.

166.What is the outward part or sign in Holy Communion?– The outward part or sign in Holy Communion is bread and wine, which the Lord hath commanded to be received.

167.What is the inward part or thing signified in the Holy Eucharist? – The inward part or thing signified in the Holy Eucharist is the Body and Blood of Christ, which are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in that Sacrament.

170.Why was the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper ordained? – For the continual remembrance of the sacrifice of the death of Christ and of the benefits which we receive thereby.

171.In the Holy Eucharist what do the Bread and Wine become? – In the Holy Eucharist the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ.” (A Catechism Authorised for use in the Diocese of North Queensland, 1965: 22).

The North Queensland Catechism is an interesting mix of both the BCP (1662) (e.g. questions and answers 166, 167 and 170) as well as other material presenting a somewhat more developed theology of the Eucharist than that found in BCP, 1662 (i.e. questions and answers 163, 164, 165 and 171). Clearly these last questions teach a much more realist notion than the others. The catechism argues that Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross is ‘pleaded’ in the Eucharist before God, thereby making a case for an instantiation of the sacrifice of the cross in the Eucharist in the present as a form of moderate realism. Question 171 is most definite in the suggestion that bread and wine ‘become’ the body and blood of Christ. The use of word ‘become’ suggests a change in the elements following consecration, but the nature of this change is not discussed. It is difficult to tell whether the change is one of substance or of a heightened efficacy without any change in substance. It is interesting to note that immoderate realism is not specifically excluded in relation to presence and sacrifice, and the bread and wine are said to become the body and blood of Christ without any qualification or explanation. Although it is unlikely that any immoderate notion of either presence or sacrifice was meant in the catechism, the fact that it is not specifically excluded could well have led to confusion and misunderstanding about the nature of eucharistic presence and sacrifice. Whatever the case, the North Queensland catechism represents a significant development in stated and authorised eucharistic doctrine, which presents a decidedly realist view of both Christ’s presence and sacrifice in the Eucharist.

A catechism produced by the Doctrine Commission of the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Australia, was issued for trial use between 1985 and 1989 (What we Believe. A Catechism of the Anglican Church of Australia, 1985). The members of the Doctrine Commission which produced the catechism included both Evangelical and Catholic Anglicans, with one Evangelical, The Rev’d Dr Peter Jensen, the then Principal of Moore Theological College in the Diocese of Sydney and Archbishop from 2001, taking a leading part in the production of this catechism (see acknowledgment of his work in the Preface). In relation to the Eucharist, the questions and answers traditionally used from BCP (1662) were abandoned and the following was written as question and answer number 29:

“29. What is promised to you in the Lord’s Supper?

As we lift up our hearts to the Lord in the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving with all the company of heaven, God assures me that, in the sharing of the bread and wine and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until he comes (1 Corinthians 11: 26), I feed on the body and blood of the Lord in my heart by faith and partake of the forgiveness of sins, eternal life, and all other benefits of his death and resurrection. For my part, I must repent of my sins, trust steadfastly in the promises of God, love my neighbour and serve Christ in the world.” (Doctrine Commission of the General Synod, What we Believe, 1985: 14).

The wording of this answer has a distinctly Reformed character about it, emphasising a heavenly feeding by faith. The act of communion is seen to be a heavenly event, where the communicant lifts up the heart to heaven. This has the distinct ring of Cranmer about it, since this is the way he refers to the act of communion, that is, as a heavenly one where the communicant lifts the heart and mind to be with Christ in heaven (Cranmer, Answer, ed. Cox, 1844: 127). The idea of sacrifice spoken of in What we Believe is one of thanks and praise only, although the wording suggests that this sacrifice is not just following the receipt of communion but an integral part of it. The act of communion is seen as an assurance of feeding on the body and blood of Christ by faith and of the benefits of Christ’s death and resurrection. There is little of a realist notion in the answer, such as the idea of an instantiation of the nature of Christ’s body and blood in the bread and wine of the Eucharist or an instantiation of the sacrifice of Christ through memorial remembrance or anamnesis. Instead there seems to be a nominalist separation implied, where the sharing of the bread and wine and the feeding on the body and blood of Christ are self-enclosed entities, one on earth and the other in heaven. The Eucharist, it seems, serves only the function of an assurance that the communicant feeds of the body and blood of Christ. No part of this catechism in What we Believe in relation to the Eucharist was taken up and used in subsequent authorised revision of the prayer book in Australia (e.g. APBA, 1995) suggesting perhaps that the BCP (1662) which was included in the new prayer book, in a modernised form of wording (APBA, 1995: 818) was preferred to the catechism published for trial use by the Doctrine Commission of General Synod in 1985.

The questions and answers related to the Eucharist in APBA (1995) will be examined at this point. Essentially these questions resemble those found in BCP (1662), but there are some word changes and modernisation. The catechism says:

“Why did Jesus give the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper?

For the continual remembrance of his atoning death, and of the benefits we receive because of it.

What is the outward part or sign of the Lord’s Supper?

Bread and wine, which the Lord commanded us to receive in remembrance of him.

What is the inward part, or thing signified?

The body and blood of Christ, which are truly taken and received by the faithful in the Lord’s Supper.

What benefits do we derive from this?

We are spiritually refreshed and strengthened by the body and blood of Christ, as our bodies are nourished by the bread and wine.

What do we look forward to as we participate in the Lord’s Supper?

As we express our unity by gathering at the Lord’s Table, we proclaim his death, and look for his coming again.” (Catechism, APBA, 1995: 818).

Whilst some of the changes in the catechism from the form found in BCP (1662) are merely modernising of the language, other changes are more significant and need additional comment. The Eucharist is still said to be a continual remembrance, but not of the sacrifice of the death of Christ, rather of ‘his atoning death’. If the Eucharist is seen to be a continual remembrance of Christ’s atoning death, then this suggests that the atoning death is not solely a past event, but one that is memorialised in the present in the Eucharist. This point is emphasised by the answer to the next question about the outward part or sign of the Eucharist. The answer adds to the wording of the BCP (1662) answer the words ‘in remembrance of him’. Where the BCP (1662) words state the bread and wine is merely to be received, APBA (1995) catechism makes the point that they are received ‘in remembrance’. This suggests memorial remembrance or anamnesis and is in line with the eucharistic liturgies in the Second Order of APBA (1995: 119-165). Here the Thanksgiving prayers use an anamnesis, and so present a theology of memorial remembrance, where the effects of Christ’s atoning death are seen to be present in the Eucharist, as opposed to a mere remembering of a past event. The last question, focussing on eschatological and ecclesiological dimensions, represent an innovation in Australian prayer books. The use of the word ‘proclaim’ also helps to emphasise that the memorial remembrance (eucharistic sacrifice) is in the present in the action of the Eucharist. The previous Australian prayer book (An Australian Prayer Book, 1978) used the catechism of the BCP (1662) without change or addition. The catechism found in APBA (1995) represents a more realist understanding of the Eucharist than is found in other previous Australian prayer books.

The catechism found in the Book of Common Prayer of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America (1979) presents a developed realist theology of the Eucharist. The following questions and answers illustrate this:

“Q. What is the Holy Eucharist?

A. The Holy Eucharist is the sacrament commanded by Christ for the continual remembrance of his life, death, and resurrection, until his coming again.

Q. Why is the Eucharist called a sacrifice?

A. Because the Eucharist, the Church’s sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, is the way by which the sacrifice of Christ is made present, and in which he unites us to his one offering of himself,

Q. By what other names is this service known?

A. The Holy Eucharist is called the Lord’s Supper, and Holy Communion; it is also known as the Divine Liturgy, the Mass and the Great Offering.

Q. What is the outward and visible sign in the Eucharist?

A. The outward and visible sign in the Eucharist is bread and wine, given and received according to Christ’s command.

Q. What is the inward and spiritual grace given in the Eucharist?

A. The inward and spiritual grace in the Holy Communion is the Body and Blood of Christ given to his people, and received by faith.” (Catechism, BCP of ECUSA, 1979: 859).

This catechism specifically calls the Eucharist a sacrifice and indicates that it is a memorial remembrance, whereby ‘the sacrifice of Christ is made present’. This is a realist statement. The sacrifice is not said to be made present by its effects or pleaded, but rather it is said to be ‘made present’ without any qualification. There is no exclusion of any immoderate realism here. It is doubtful whether immoderate realism is meant, but the failure to exclude it could give rise to the misunderstanding that Christ is actually sacrificed in the Eucharist. This conclusion is lessened by part of the previous answer however, where the sacrifice is described as ‘one offering’. Realist notions are however strengthened by the wording of the answer following the question about the inward and spiritual grace in the Holy Communion. The body and blood of Christ is here described as being given to people and received by faith. Marion Hatchett in his commentary of the BCP of ECUSA (1979) argues that the wording of the catechism in this prayer book is in line with the eucharistic prayers found in the book, especially as they relate to the anamnesis and the memorial acclamations. These he argues have both biblical and patristic warrant (Hatchett, 1980: 581).

An extensive catechism of 144 questions and answers is found in the prayer book of the Province of Southern Africa (An Anglican Prayer Book, 1989: 423-444). The questions and answers relating the Eucharist in this prayer book (113-119) are identical to the questions and answers in the BCP of ECUSA (1979). The theology of the Eucharist expressed in the prayer book of the Province of Southern Africa can therefore be interpreted with the same comments applied above to the catechism of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America. The realism of the catechism in the Southern African prayer book is matched by realism in the eucharistic liturgies of that book, (see An Anglican Prayer Book, 1989: 101-144).

In the Church of England, a catechism was not included in the Alternative Service Book (1980) or in its replacement Common Worship (2000). Instead the Revised Catechism, written in 1962, is used as a document associated with prayer books, although plans are being made in England for the production of a new catechism (Norman, 2001: xii). The BCP (1662) Catechism is still in force in the Church of England, and used along with the Revised Catechism. The material in the Revised Catechism of 1962relating to the Eucharist is as follows:

“47 What is Holy Communion?

Holy Communion is the Sacrament in which, according to Christ’s command, we make continual remembrance of him, his passion, death, and resurrection, until his coming again, and in which we thankfully receive the benefits of his sacrifice. It is, therefore, called the Eucharist, the Church’s sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; and also the Lord’s Supper, the meal of fellowship which unites us to Christ and to the whole Church.

48What is the outward and visible sign in Holy Communion?

The outward and visible sign in Holy Communion is bread and wine given and received as the Lord commanded.

49What is the inward and spiritual gift in Holy Communion?

The inward and spiritual gift in Holy Communion is the Body and Blood of Christ, truly and indeed given by him and received by the faithful.

50What is meant by receiving the Body and Blood of Christ?

Receiving the Body and Blood of Christ means receiving the life of Christ himself, who was crucified and rose again, and is now alive for evermore.

51What are the benefits we receive in Holy Communion?

The benefits we receive are the strengthening of our union with Christ and his Church, the forgiveness of our sins, and the nourishing of ourselves for eternal life.” (Revised Catechism of the Church of England, 1962: 6).

This catechism, by speaking of continual remembrance (that is, memorial remembrance or anamnesis), and by matching this theology with the theology expressed in the eucharistic orders of the Alternative Service Book (1980) and Common Worship (2000), presents a moderate realism in relation to Christ’s presence and sacrifice in the Eucharist. The Eucharist is described as a ‘continual remembrance’ and referred to as ‘the Church’s sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving’. The fact that the ‘continual remembrance’ and the ‘Church’s sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving’ are referred to in the same answer (47) suggests that the Church’s sacrifice is more than praise and thanksgiving for a past event. The use of the word ‘make’ also suggests that the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving is more memorial remembrance than mere grateful thanks for a past and completed event in salvation history. The Eucharist is therefore the effective means of receiving the benefits of Christ’s sacrifice in the present and the means by which the relationship between Christ and the faithful is strengthened. The body and blood of Christ is said to be truly given and received in the Eucharist, although there is no direct association of the gift with the bread and wine, but with the Eucharist as a whole. An ecclesial dimension is also present in this catechism since it is described as being a meal of fellowship for the whole Church.

A New Zealand Prayer Book (1989) includes a catechism which makes reference to the Eucharist. The following questions and answers are found relating to the Eucharist:

“48. What is the Eucharist?

The Eucharist is the sacrament of thanksgiving given by Christ for the continual recalling of his life, death and resurrection. It is the family meal of the Church in which we are strengthened in our union with the living Christ and with one another for service in the world.

48.What is the outward and visible sign in the Eucharist?

Bread and wine, given, shared and received as Christ commanded.

49.What is the inward and spiritual grace?

The life of Christ, the body and blood, given by Christ and received by faith.

50.How are we to come to the Eucharist?

We come trusting in God’s forgiving love, having examined our lives and with goodwill towards others. We come to make thanksgiving, expecting to meet Christ, to be filled with new life.” (Catechism, A New Zealand Prayer Book, 1989: 933-934).

A New Zealand Prayer Book presents a moderate realism in relation to Christ’s presence and sacrifice in the Eucharist. Memorial remembrance or anamnesis is meant by ‘the continual recalling of his life, death and resurrection’, and this idea is matched in the eucharistic liturgies presented in the prayer book. It should be noted that the word ‘sacrifice’ is not used in this catechism in relation to the Eucharist, perhaps in an attempt to limit any possible misunderstanding in an immoderate sense of realism. The body and blood of Christ is said to be received by the faithful but there is no specific association of the body and blood with the bread and wine, although the association with the Eucharist as a whole is implied by reading questions and answers 49 and 50 together. There is a clear expectation that the body and blood of Christ will be found in the Eucharist and will be received by faith.

The writing of catechisms in modern times is rare but not unknown in the Anglican Communion. Edward Norman (Chancellor of York Minster) published a catechism in 2001, entitled An Anglican Catechism. Whilst not an official document of the Church of England, Norman’s work represents a modern and continuing attempt to express a schema of instruction in a form other than the question and answer model. An Anglican Catechism (2001) sets out its statements in continuous prose organised into sections and chapters. In relation to the sacraments the following is found:

“The Incarnation was the supreme use of the materiality of the creation to further the divine scheme of redemption, but there are other special rites, instituted by Christ, in which the truths of God receive earthly expression. Of these the Church of England recognizes Baptism and the Holy Eucharist as authentic sacraments necessary for individual participation in the scheme of salvation. The important fact about the sacraments is that they are objectively true: they do not depend upon the human senses or human responses to have real effect, and the unworthiness of those who perform the rites in which they are delivered, or of those who receive them, does not in any way detract from their sacred character. When the Church performs the ceremonies associated with the sacramental function, for example, there may be accompanying transports of fellowship or a sense of Christian communal identity; these, however, are not of the essence of the sacrament, but are external accidents. Despite some difficulties of precise definition, which believers though the centuries have encountered, the objective reality of sacramental grace – the operation of the Holy Spirit in the act of Baptism, and the real presence of the Lord in the Holy Communion – are present without any reference to the human condition of those involved in the rites. Grace is the means by which God sanctifies his people, and grace is received independently of human understanding, in the promise which he has made to present his benefits under the earthly forms available to his creatures.” (Norman, 2001: 44-45).

Norman embraces a sacramental principle in his discussion. His use of the words ‘materiality of the creation to further the divine scheme of redemption’ and ‘the truths of God receive earthly expression’ (Norman, 2001: 44) suggest a moderate realism, where material objects and earthly expressions instantiate divine schemes and truths. Norman also contends that the sacraments are ‘objectively true’ (Norman, 2001: 44) in the sense that they do not depend upon human senses or responses in order to have real effect. This objective truth is for Norman the ‘essence of the sacrament’ (Norman, 2001: 44) that is, ‘the objective reality of sacramental grace’, which in the Eucharist, is seen as the real presence of Christ, without an insistence on the precise means of the presence (Norman, 2001: 45). Although he does not use the terms ‘sacrifice’, ‘memorial remembrance’ or anamnesis, these are implied in Norman’s words, especially when he speaks of Christ presenting ‘his benefits under the earthly forms available to his creatures’ (Norman, 2001: 45). The benefits of Christ are therefore spoken of in a moderate realist sense, where they are instantiated in the sacraments through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Norman makes specific mention of the Eucharist in the following words:

“The sacrament of the Lord’s Supper constitutes the central act of Christian worship, and follows the instruction of Jesus himself that his last meal with his disciples should be perpetuated. It is not an occasion of mere fellowship, however, but the presence of Christ himself. To those who ‘rightly, worthily, and with faith’ receive this sacrament, according to the formularies of the Church of England, the bread ‘is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ’ (Article XXVIII). The Church of England denies that there is any material change in the sacred elements used in the rite (transubstantiation), but upholds the ancient belief that the presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist transcends the evidences of the senses. Whereas the rite plainly has some characteristics of a memorializing or commemorative event it is also taken to impart a special grace of Christ – his very body and blood, truly received in faith. It was believed in the early Church that angels gathered around the altar when the priest offered the sacred words of institution – an indication of the effect of the sacrament in uniting the seen and the unseen worlds, and in reminding the People of God that they exist simultaneously both in time and eternity. The presence of the unseen community of those who love God is inseparable from the objective truth of the sacrament: Christ really is here, and so is the witness of the hosts of believers who are now in eternity. The Blessed Sacrament of the altar is to be especially venerated and to be affirmed with the greatest reverence available to humankind, because it is the Last Supper itself, and no mere representation, which occurs when the people gather around the holy table. It is Christ who presides at the altar: his sacred action, forever performed for humanity, expressed through the officiating minister. The forgiveness of sins through the enactment of the new covenant, the great expiation in the death of the Saviour himself, is a present reality, an intimation of the blessedness of eternity, and an exercise for those still in the world of the dignity of celestial citizenship. The Lord’s Supper is the gateway to the Kingdom of Heaven, the place where time exchanges with the mystery of the eternal. It is not necessary to understand the exact means by which grace is transmitted for even the most humble intellect to receive the fullness of God’s mercy.” (Norman, 2001: 47-49).

In this discussion of the Eucharist Norman affirms a realist understanding of the presence and sacrifice of Christ in the Eucharist. He states that the Eucharist is more than fellowship and mere remembrance and argues for an objective reality of presence or gift and givenness in the Eucharist. The Eucharist is the presence of Christ himself. Those who receive the bread and wine, worthily and in faith, receive the body and blood of Christ. This occurs without any material change in the elements and despite the sense information suggesting that the bread remains bread and the wine remains wine. Christ presence or nature is instantiated in the bread and wine in a moderate realist sense, since Norman clearly denies any immoderate sense of presence.

Norman also affirms a moderate realist sense of eucharistic sacrifice, since he states that the Eucharist is more than memorialising and commemorating. The Eucharist imparts grace through the real presence of Christ and through the present reality of the benefits of Christ’s passion. This objective reality and givenness occurs through the power of the Holy Spirit. What Norman is saying is that the Eucharist is more than mere representation and more than simply remembering a past event (the death of Christ at Calvary). Any idea of remembrance is much more dynamic than simply bringing to mind a past event as an act of memory. In the Eucharist there is an anamnesis or memorial remembrance, where the effects of the sacrifice of Christ are present and available in the Eucharist in the context of its celebration. The Eucharist, in the terms of this project, is seen to be an instantiation of the benefits of Christ’s passion in the presence (memorial remembrance or anamnesis). The new covenant is enacted in the Eucharist and the benefits of Christ’s passion are a real and available in the present. Christ’s forgiveness and expiation are a present reality in the Eucharist. This occurs in a moderate realist fashion without the necessity of known the means for this to happen.

Norman is careful not to associate the presence of Christ in the Eucharist too closely or too exclusively with the elements of bread and wine, although they function as a focus of the presence of Christ. It is the whole eucharistic rite which assures the reality of the presence and the sacrifice of Christ in the Eucharist. The realism expressed by Norman is moderate but it is not closely defined or localised in the elements. It is for Norman, as the people gather around the table, that Christ presides in a real presence and that the benefits of his passion are enacted and renewed. At the same time the presence and sacrifice of Christ are seen to be an objective truth, apart from the person who receives. Any notion of receptionism seems to be kept at some distance since Norman states that the blessed sacrament of the altar is to be venerated and affirmed with reverence (Norman, 2001: 48-49). Norman’s discussion of the Eucharist excludes any nominalist understanding and affirms a moderate realism in regard to Christ’s presence and sacrifice in the Eucharist.

In this case study various catechisms have been examined in relation to the theology of the Eucharist and Christ’s presence and sacrifice in the Eucharist, expressed in those catechisms. It is concluded that both nominalist and realist understanding of the Eucharist are found in these catechisms. Some catechisms are forthright in the realism they present (e.g. A Catechism Authorised for use in the Diocese of North Queensland, 1965; the catechism in the Book of Common Prayer of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America, 1979; and the catechism in the Southern African, An Anglican Prayer Book, 1989). Others are realist but less forthright (e.g. A Revised Catechism of the Church of England, 1962, A Prayer Book for Australia, 1995 and An Anglican Catechism, 2001). Some catechisms in the Anglican tradition have presented a nominalist theology of the Eucharist (e.g. Short Catechism, 1553 and Doctrine Commission of the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Australia, What we Believe, 1985). What also seems clear is that the catechism set out in the Book of Common Prayer (1662) is a judicious piece of writing, since it is written in such a way that it is possible to sustain both a realist and nominalist understanding of the Eucharist and Christ’s presence and sacrifice in the Eucharist. This is shown in the different ways that the catechism has been interpreted. Daniel (1913) has interpreted the 1662 catechism in a realist way, while Neil and Willoughby (1913) have interpreted it in a nominalist way. It seems likely that both a realist and nominalist interpretation of the Eucharist remains possible in most catechisms of the Anglican Communion, although the nominalist interpretation would be harder to extract in the prayer books of say the United States of America and Southern Africa.

The catechism seems destined to remain in the Anglican tradition in a variety of forms and with a variety of possible interpretations. Edward Norman’s An Anglican Catechism, published in 2001 is an example of the continuing and developing presence of the catechism in the Anglican Communion and in the way it defines a doctrine of the Eucharist. Distinctive sixteenth-century understandings, such as the once for all sacrifice and the receiving of Christ’s body and blood by faith are to be found in catechisms in current use. At the same time other understandings, coming from primitive sources, such as the notion of a real presence of Christ in the Eucharist and the memorial remembrance or anamnesis, whereby the effects of Christ’s sacrifice are known in the present, seem firmly established in the modern practice of Anglicanism and its theology of the Eucharist. The analysis of the various catechisms of the Anglican tradition leads to the conclusion that both realism and nominalism are sustained within these documents by various member Churches of the Anglican Communion. It also seems possible to conclude that where realist interpretations are made, this is done in the form of moderate realism.